Regarding the AP scandal, the AG has been instructed to investigate himself. I'm sure he'll be objective. The person who has been told to resign as a result of the IRS scandal has plead the 5th in order to avoid incriminating herself for supposedly not doing anything wrong, has refused to resign, and is now on paid administrative leave. Free time off. The mouth piece for the administration and the State Department, Victoria Neuland, repeatedly stated she had no clue as to the cause of the attack in Benghazi in the days following, but released emails show that without a doubt she DID know.

Aahh, transparency.

And Fox News told you all that stuff so of course you believe it, in the most facile and damning of comprehensions.

And Fox News told you all that stuff so of course you believe it, in the most facile and damning of comprehensions.

Aahh, rightwing ideology.

it is awesome how this has become your only recourse...throw out FoxNews no matter what is said.

The sky is blue....foxnews watcher

I think the Heat will win the NBA title....Foxnews watcher

ahhh...the life of a sheep

Hey, you're the Fox News watching sheep, not me. Don't try to deny it. You're foaming at the mouth just like the rest of the hysterical righties. Except you don't know you are a righty, because you can't tell the difference between the two parties. LOL

Hey, you're the Fox News watching sheep, not me. Don't try to deny it. You're foaming at the mouth just like the rest of the hysterical righties. Except you don't know you are a righty, because you can't tell the difference between the two parties. LOL

It has already been established that you watch FoxNews more than anyone on this forum, you cant change that now.

And yes, I am foaming at the mouth, as should the whole country. You wont because the guy sitting in the White House has a (D) by his name, so in your little world that means you are not allowed to say anything bad at all.

We should all be POed that the IRS targeted groups based on political ideology, no matter what groups they were. But you are not because you don't like those groups and in your little mind if you don't like someone they don't deserve the same rights as you.

If a guy with an (R) by his name told the Justice Dept to investigate itself you would be marching on the White House, but since a guy with a (D) by his name did it, well it is all cool.

Hey, you're the Fox News watching sheep, not me. Don't try to deny it. You're foaming at the mouth just like the rest of the hysterical righties. Except you don't know you are a righty, because you can't tell the difference between the two parties. LOL

It has already been established that you watch FoxNews more than anyone on this forum, you cant change that now.

And yes, I am foaming at the mouth, as should the whole country. You wont because the guy sitting in the White House has a (D) by his name, so in your little world that means you are not allowed to say anything bad at all.

We should all be POed that the IRS targeted groups based on political ideology, no matter what groups they were. But you are not because you don't like those groups and in your little mind if you don't like someone they don't deserve the same rights as you.

If a guy with an (R) by his name told the Justice Dept to investigate itself you would be marching on the White House, but since a guy with a (D) by his name did it, well it is all cool.

I watch Fox News for about ten minutes per month. Now I know that qualifies for a lot of things in your mind, but the only thing established here is that you have very poor critical thinking skills which, like many on the right, leads to foaming at the mouth.

I watch Fox News for about ten minutes per month. Now I know that qualifies for a lot of things in your mind, but the only thing established here is that you have very poor critical thinking skills which, like many on the right, leads to foaming at the mouth.

well you have me beat by about 10 minutes per month. seems you still win.

So, what is your opinion of the Justice Dept being told to investigate itself and report back to Obama in a month or two?

I agree that the administration shows strong evidence of abuses of power. What is amazing to me is that the Republicans here think it is all brand new and unique to this administration. They seem to have a very very short and highly selective memory.

I agree that the administration shows strong evidence of abuses of power. What is amazing to me is that the Republicans here think it is all brand new and unique to this administration. They seem to have a very very short and highly selective memory.

For patently partisan reasons, the GOP and their apologists sling against others that which they are most guilty. It's been the case for 50 years.

I agree that the administration shows strong evidence of abuses of power. What is amazing to me is that the Republicans here think it is all brand new and unique to this administration. They seem to have a very very short and highly selective memory.

who has said it is unique to this administration?

what amazes me is the very people that hate Bush so much keep bringing up Bush to defend Obama. Is this really the best that can be said "at least he is better than Bush".

I agree that the administration shows strong evidence of abuses of power. What is amazing to me is that the Republicans here think it is all brand new and unique to this administration. They seem to have a very very short and highly selective memory.

who has said it is unique to this administration?

what amazes me is the very people that hate Bush so much keep bringing up Bush to defend Obama. Is this really the best that can be said "at least he is better than Bush".

Your misdirected, childish anger is with the US political system. In your own words ... If Obama had an R behind his name, you'd be providing all the silent support he could ever need. You're the lowest of trolling hacks.

If you want to really know the truth about the administrations blatant abuses of power then you have to actually investigate a little beyond the surface propaganda:

I particularly enjoy his statement in response to the claim by Dawkins that Islam is the greatest threats to humanity. Chomsky's response which should interest several here is at 19:00 min. mark.

His comment about Christianity would have held a bit more weight had he backed it up with a bit of reason. Just to throw out the statement and then move on was a bit weak, to say the least. He is normally better than that.

I watch Fox News for about ten minutes per month. Now I know that qualifies for a lot of things in your mind, but the only thing established here is that you have very poor critical thinking skills which, like many on the right, leads to foaming at the mouth.

well you have me beat by about 10 minutes per month. seems you still win.

So, what is your opinion of the Justice Dept being told to investigate itself and report back to Obama in a month or two?

I think it's a good idea.

The typical facile (my new favorite word, I hope I'm using it right) understanding of Fox News viewers like zulu, and you is "Holder is being told by Obama to investigate himself" as zulu put it. The word 'investigate' is of course full of criminal connotations. As if Holder is going to act as prosecution, defense and jury on himself.

Of course the truth is that " he has ordered Attorney General Eric Holder to conduct a 45-day review of the department’s guidelines on the issue."

Which of course due to your haste to find fault, and facile understanding, you and the witch hunters then apparently think it is a bad idea for a dept of the govt to review their guidelines.

This is similar to your dismissal and criticism of his stated desire to review drone policy. Even when he does a good logical thing that you find fault and create some bizarre motives for it that are nothing but small scary insects in your fevered imagination. You could get a job on FoxNews.

I could go on, but bottom line is that in your haste to hang Obama you forgot one thing. A believable case against him that is based on more than just imagined atrocities. And once again, critical thinking.

If you want to really know the truth about the administrations blatant abuses of power then you have to actually investigate a little beyond the surface propaganda:

I particularly enjoy his statement in response to the claim by Dawkins that Islam is the greatest threats to humanity. Chomsky's response which should interest several here is at 19:00 min. mark.

His comment about Christianity would have held a bit more weight had he backed it up with a bit of reason. Just to throw out the statement and then move on was a bit weak, to say the least. He is normally better than that.

It was a typical Chomsky throw away remark. Not really the point of the video. Did you bother to watch the whole interview? I thought it was quite interesting. Certainly not complementary towards Obama.

The typical facile (my new favorite word, I hope I'm using it right) understanding of Fox News viewers like zulu, and you is "Holder is being told by Obama to investigate himself" as zulu put it. The word 'investigate' is of course full of criminal connotations. As if Holder is going to act as prosecution, defense and jury on himself.

Of course the truth is that " he has ordered Attorney General Eric Holder to conduct a 45-day review of the department’s guidelines on the issue."

Which of course due to your haste to find fault, and facile understanding, you and the witch hunters then apparently think it is a bad idea for a dept of the govt to review their guidelines.

This is similar to your dismissal and criticism of his stated desire to review drone policy. Even when he does a good logical thing that you find fault and create some bizarre motives for it that are nothing but small scary insects in your fevered imagination. You could get a job on FoxNews.

I could go on, but bottom line is that in your haste to hang Obama you forgot one thing. A believable case against him that is based on more than just imagined atrocities. And once again, critical thinking.

It was a typical Chomsky throw away remark. Not really the point of the video. Did you bother to watch the whole interview? I thought it was quite interesting. Certainly not complementary towards Obama.

Regarding the AP scandal, the AG has been instructed to investigate himself. I'm sure he'll be objective. The person who has been told to resign as a result of the IRS scandal has plead the 5th in order to avoid incriminating herself for supposedly not doing anything wrong, has refused to resign, and is now on paid administrative leave. Free time off. The mouth piece for the administration and the State Department, Victoria Neuland, repeatedly stated she had no clue as to the cause of the attack in Benghazi in the days following, but released emails show that without a doubt she DID know.

Aahh, transparency.

And Fox News told you all that stuff so of course you believe it, in the most facile and damning of comprehensions.

Aahh, rightwing ideology.

Are you saying, then, that Eric Holder will NOT be investigating his own department, and in effect, himself? Or that the IRS head who plead the 5th is NOT refusing to resign, though asked by her boss to do so, and is NOT currently on paid leave, and that Neuland did NOT have emails before her own claim of the "video" that casts doubt on that claim? That was made up by media?

Are you saying, then, that Eric Holder will NOT be investigating his own department, and in effect, himself? Or that the IRS head who plead the 5th is NOT refusing to resign, though asked by her boss to do so, and is NOT currently on paid leave, and that Neuland did NOT have emails before her own claim of the "video" that casts doubt on that claim? That was made up by media?

no, Holder will be reviewing his own department and himself. and that is ok because he didn't use the word investigating.

This is the depths that the sheep have to stoop to in order to keep defending the actions of this Admin

Regarding the AP scandal, the AG has been instructed to investigate himself. I'm sure he'll be objective. The person who has been told to resign as a result of the IRS scandal has plead the 5th in order to avoid incriminating herself for supposedly not doing anything wrong, has refused to resign, and is now on paid administrative leave. Free time off. The mouth piece for the administration and the State Department, Victoria Neuland, repeatedly stated she had no clue as to the cause of the attack in Benghazi in the days following, but released emails show that without a doubt she DID know.

Aahh, transparency.

And Fox News told you all that stuff so of course you believe it, in the most facile and damning of comprehensions.

Aahh, rightwing ideology.

Are you saying, then, that Eric Holder will NOT be investigating his own department, and in effect, himself?

Are you saying, then, that Eric Holder will NOT be investigating his own department, and in effect, himself? Or that the IRS head who plead the 5th is NOT refusing to resign, though asked by her boss to do so, and is NOT currently on paid leave, and that Neuland did NOT have emails before her own claim of the "video" that casts doubt on that claim? That was made up by media?

no, Holder will be reviewing his own department and himself. and that is ok because he didn't use the word investigating.

This is the depths that the sheep have to stoop to in order to keep defending the actions of this Admin

No. You still don't get it do you? Using the phrase 'investigate himself' is a far cry from 'doing a review of dept policies'. In your rabid effort to disparage the Obama admin. you prefer the former, less accurate, more incendiary term to suit your narrative. And now you reaffirm your lack of critical thinking by considering these two phrases to be the same thing.

No. You still don't get it do you? Using the phrase 'investigate himself' is a far cry from 'doing a review of dept policies'. In your rabid effort to disparage the Obama admin. you prefer the former, less accurate, more incendiary term to suit your narrative. And now you reaffirm your lack of critical thinking by considering these two phrases to be the same thing.

don't worry dude, I would never except you to say something bad about Obama or his Admin.

It is ok, I understand. I once was a blind partisan. It is so much easier to just follow where led instead of stopping to think for yourself.

No. You still don't get it do you? Using the phrase 'investigate himself' is a far cry from 'doing a review of dept policies'. In your rabid effort to disparage the Obama admin. you prefer the former, less accurate, more incendiary term to suit your narrative. And now you reaffirm your lack of critical thinking by considering these two phrases to be the same thing.

don't worry dude, I would never except you to say something bad about Obama or his Admin.

It is ok, I understand. I once was a blind partisan. It is so much easier to just follow where led instead of stopping to think for yourself.

so, which definition is for which...

toexamine,study,orinquireintosystematically

toinspect,especiallyformallyorofficially:

It's OK sho. You can't tell the difference between 'investigate himself' and 'review of department guidelines'.

Like you can't tell the two parties apart or whether a man can walk on water or not. It's OK. Not everyone has critical thinking skills.

It was a typical Chomsky throw away remark. Not really the point of the video. Did you bother to watch the whole interview? I thought it was quite interesting. Certainly not complementary towards Obama.

I did. and Chomsky has never been a fan of Obama, why is this news?

Cool your jets, I was just asking. Yes, I agree with your previous post 100%. You are absolutely correct. However, I think you are sucking into the FOX news anti-Obama propaganda a bit too easily. His real crimes are more along the lines outlined by Noam... just say'n. Realizing the difference IS important actually. The other stuff is mostly right-wing propaganda. They are throwing everything at the wall and hoping something sticks. Some of it will to some extent but none of it is ANY different than done by countless Administrations far back into the past.

The stuff done by Dick Cheney still gives me the creeps. That he would be so bold as to out a CIA agent for his own political gain is astounding actually. And that the dems held their fire several times during that horrendously horrible Administration is also telling.

Are you saying, then, that Eric Holder will NOT be investigating his own department, and in effect, himself? Or that the IRS head who plead the 5th is NOT refusing to resign, though asked by her boss to do so, and is NOT currently on paid leave, and that Neuland did NOT have emails before her own claim of the "video" that casts doubt on that claim? That was made up by media?

no, Holder will be reviewing his own department and himself. and that is ok because he didn't use the word investigating.

This is the depths that the sheep have to stoop to in order to keep defending the actions of this Admin

No. You still don't get it do you? Using the phrase 'investigate himself' is a far cry from 'doing a review of dept policies'. In your rabid effort to disparage the Obama admin. you prefer the former, less accurate, more incendiary term to suit your narrative. And now you reaffirm your lack of critical thinking by considering these two phrases to be the same thing.

Holder is going to investigate HIS OWN DEPARTMENT. He's going to investigate the policies that led to the "existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters", based on an order HE SIGNED to investigate reporters. So Holder is going to do an investigation on HIMSELF. It's not spin, it's what he is going to do. You and the other apologists can call it whatever you want.

It was a typical Chomsky throw away remark. Not really the point of the video. Did you bother to watch the whole interview? I thought it was quite interesting. Certainly not complementary towards Obama.

I did. and Chomsky has never been a fan of Obama, why is this news?

Cool your jets, I was just asking. Yes, I agree with your previous post 100%. You are absolutely correct. However, I think you are sucking into the FOX news anti-Obama propaganda a bit too easily. His real crimes are more along the lines outlined by Noam... just say'n. Realizing the difference IS important actually. The other stuff is mostly right-wing propaganda. They are throwing everything at the wall and hoping something sticks. Some of it will to some extent but none of it is ANY different than done by countless Administrations far back into the past.

The stuff done by Dick Cheney still gives me the creeps. That he would be so bold as to out a CIA agent for his own political gain is astounding actually. And that the dems held their fire several times during that horrendously horrible Administration is also telling.

The Arkansas Project and Whitewater, anyone? We've seen this B-movie before.

I had fully expected to see troops turn against the administration and refuse to follow orders at certain points in the previous administration's prosecution against all-things-democratic. As one who fully understands their mentality to obey superiors, it still continues to confound me that all troops could be so easily led as sheep.

Are you saying, then, that Eric Holder will NOT be investigating his own department, and in effect, himself? Or that the IRS head who plead the 5th is NOT refusing to resign, though asked by her boss to do so, and is NOT currently on paid leave, and that Neuland did NOT have emails before her own claim of the "video" that casts doubt on that claim? That was made up by media?

no, Holder will be reviewing his own department and himself. and that is ok because he didn't use the word investigating.

This is the depths that the sheep have to stoop to in order to keep defending the actions of this Admin

No. You still don't get it do you? Using the phrase 'investigate himself' is a far cry from 'doing a review of dept policies'. In your rabid effort to disparage the Obama admin. you prefer the former, less accurate, more incendiary term to suit your narrative. And now you reaffirm your lack of critical thinking by considering these two phrases to be the same thing.

Holder is going to investigate HIS OWN DEPARTMENT. He's going to investigate the policies that led to the "existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters", based on an order HE SIGNED to investigate reporters. So Holder is going to do an investigation on HIMSELF. It's not spin, it's what he is going to do. You and the other apologists can call it whatever you want.

No, he is going to review the department guidelines. You can spin it all you want just like Faux News does but he is doing a review of dept guidelines. You see, they 'investigated' reporters, they did not 'review' the reporters. He has not been ordered to investigate dept guidelines he has been ordered to review dept guidelines.